Approved
UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX
PROJECT COORDINATION GROUP
16 May 2013
(14.00 – 16.00)
MINUTES
Chair
Bryn Morris (OBM)
Present
Marc Albano (MA), Jo Andrews (JA), Emma Griffin (EG), Richard Harrison (RH),
Bernarde Hyde (BH), Zoe Manning (ZM) (by conference phone), Richard Murphy
(RM), Richard Stock (RS), Vanessa Potter (VP) Sonia Virdee (SV)
Secretary
Nicky Jackson (NJ)
In attendance
Debbie Brooke (DB), Wendy Clifton-Sprigg (WCS) for items 4a-4b, 6a
Nathan Bolton (NB), Jo Davies (JD), Maria Fasli (MF), Tracy Robinson (TR), Jane
Wright (JW)
1 Apologies
2 Minutes of the last meeting, 14 March 2013 (PCG/13/17)
Agreed
3
The minutes from the 14 March 2013 were approved as a correct record of the
meeting.
78/13
Matters arising from the minutes (PCG/13/18)
Noted
Agreed
An action log had been provided giving an update on each of the actions
arising from the previous meeting.
79/13
That the closure report from a Project should be revised to include the
realisation of benefits from project savings. The closure template would be
revised to accommodate this action, as part of the development of the new
project management framework agreed in principle by PCG at its March
meeting.
Action: RH
80/13
The action log was an efficient way of providing an update on actions and
should continue at future meetings.
81/13
4 New Projects
a) Attendance Monitoring (PCG/13/19)
Noted
USG had supported the attendance monitoring project, and the project
proposal had been considered and supported by CBSSG.
82/13
It was difficult to quantify the exact amount of savings to be gained from staff
time currently spent on attendance monitoring as the approach differed
between departments.
83/13
It was suggested that a representative from Procurement should be added to
the project team for the procurement process.
84/13
1
Agreed
The project would require the on-going support from the Audio Visual and
Media Services team, which would stretch their team’s resources.
85/13
That the Option 1 of the project was approved, subject to the allocation of
capital expenditure budget for 2013-14. Consideration would only be given to
Options 2 or 3 if Option 1 was not available.
86/13
If Option 1 should not be available, the project would need to be referred back
to PCG for further consideration.
87/13
b) Student Services Centre Project – IT Requirements (CRM for the
Student Services Centre) (PCG/13/20)
Noted
The project proposal had been considered and supported by CBSSG. There
were four main areas for the Student Services Centre Project; new
systems/enhancements to support process improvement, room booking
system, queue management and telephony.
88/13
New systems/enhancements to support process improvement
The SSCP should also consider that data/processes should include pre-arrival
students, so that systems could work together.
89/13
Agreed
Room booking system
The cost was disproportionate to the potential benefits, and this aspect of the
proposed project was not a priority.
90/13
Noted
Agreed
Noted
Agreed
The proposal be not approved. Alternative systems should be explored eg the
accommodation system used by the University.
91/13
Customer Relationship Management System (CRM)
The CRM system was fully supported. It was noted that the system should link
with other University systems, especially with the web and social media
content and across a multi-campus environment. It was important to recognise
that queries would also enter the system from internal sources (for example
via departments) as well as from students.
92/13
The project would source external consultancy and expertise in MS Dynamics
and solutions architecture. It was not possible to prioritise this over other MIS
projects.
93/13
The requirement for a dedicated Project Manager for this project was
discussed. It was decided that an internal Project Manager would need to be
allocated as appointing a 0.4 Project Manager was unlikely to appeal to an
external candidate. The investment in time, training and the loss of expertise
post implementation would not benefit us when realising future benefits.
94/13
The CRM and software developer be approved to a total spend of £300,000 in
2013-14, subject to the primary resource being available.
95/13
c) KPI reporting Phase 1 (PCG/13/21)
Noted
The purpose of the proposal was to request resources/technical expertise to
support the production of the University’s new KPI report and was integral to
delivering the new Strategic Plan and the new annual strategic planning
process.
96/13
The project proposal had been submitted to CBSS for consideration. CBSS
approved the project for consideration at PCG.
97/13
2
Agreed
The project required MIS time, and this had been prioritised for this project.
The MIS support was available until the end of September.
98/13
The Group agreed to approve the project with the caveat that should the
project timeline slip beyond the schedule for MIS support to the end of
September, this would not receive the required MIS support.
99/13
d) Marketing Activities Reporting Services (PCG/13/22)
Noted
Agreed
The proposal would allow the University intelligently to target resources and
activities to yield maximum benefit from the resources allocated to marketing
and recruitment activities.
100/13
The project proposal had been submitted to CBSS for consideration. CBSS
approved the project, subject to the appropriate MIS resource being available.
MIS had subsequently confirmed that the resource for this project would be
available.
101/13
The Group approved the project.
102/13
e) Exam Paper Approval and Storage Project Phase 2 (PCG/13/23)
Noted
Agreed
The project proposal would improve efficiency and security of exam paper
handling within the University.
103/13
The project proposal had been submitted to CBSS for consideration. CBSS
approved the project, subject to the necessary resources being available.
104/13
The proposed project could not be approved until it had been confirmed that
the required MIS resource was available to support the project.
105/13
That RM, liaising as necessary with EG as sponsor of the proposed project,
should consider further the availability of MIS resource and that if it could be
confirmed that this resource was available OBM should have authority to take
chair’s action to approve the project on behalf of the Group.
Action: RM
106/13
f) Essex Abroad – Transparency for Employability Project (PCG/13/24)
5
Noted
The project proposal was submitted to CBSS for consideration. CBSS
remained reluctant to recommend the project to PCG.
107/13
Agreed
The project was not supported as the number of students currently having an
‘including year abroad’ option was low.
108/13
The project should not be submitted to either CBSS or PCG until the number
of students exceeded 400 students per year, and that if the number of
students exceeded this threshold any revised proposal would be considered
on its merits at that time.
109/13
Management Response to the SUMS Review of MIS (PCG/13/25)
Noted
The initial response to the SUMS review of MIS was received and good
progress was being made.
110/13
It was noted that item 5 in Appendix A had been omitted from the original
report.
111/13
3
Agreed
6
That a number of the proposed responses to individual action points in the
report needed to be more detailed responses, and that all the responses
needed to have deadlines attributed to them.
112/13
It was requested that an updated Appendix B be provided detailing the names
in each of the teams once all the HR consultation processes had been
concluded. This had been omitted due to the ongoing changes in
responsibilities.
113/13
The example of staff resource allocation in Appendix C was well received. It
was requested that this be provided for all teams for the next meeting of PCG.
114/13
The Group discussed the issue of UNIFACE and the diminishing pool of
resources available to support it. It was noted that the University did not plan
to move away from UNIFACE and would continue to use UNIFACE. A defined
action plan needed to be drawn up.
115/13
A template should be developed for future management responses to SUMS
reports.
Action: RH
116/13
The management response to the SUMS report should be revised as set out
above.
Action: RM
117/13
Information on the allocation of staff resource in ISS in relation to projects
should be submitted to the first meeting of the Group in 2013-14, in the format
set out in Appendix C of the management response.
Action: RM
118/13
Reports on Completed Projects
a) Project report on the Student Services Centre (PCG/13/26)
Noted
Agreed
The report was found to be very useful and kept the University up to date with
progress. The table in Appendix 2 outlined each stage of the project. The
Group would find it useful to note where the completion of a phase had
slipped. This should be added to the report.
119/13
There should be a greater visibility of progress on the Student Services
Centre. It was noted that a newsletter was sent to individuals associated with
the project keeping them informed of progress. A regular update should be
provided generally to the University staff/students informing them of the
progress.
Action: WCS
120/13
Further similar reports should be provided to the Group on the completion of
each stage of the project.
121/13
4
b) Progress report on the Strategic Projects Portfolio (PCG/13/27)
Noted
Agreed
The report gave a comprehensive list of projects and their status.
122/13
Non-submission of reports
Project 1233 – that no progress had been made in relation to this project as
when it had been approved no resource had been allocated to it. Due to the
gap since its original approval there was now a need to review the
specification for this system.
123/13
Project 1261 – was currently at a red or amber status and a project report
must be included for the next meeting of PCG.
124/13
There were no concerns regarding project slippage detailed in paragraph 5
and set out in detail in Annex 3.
125/13
Members of the Group found the progress reports to be useful, and these
should continue to be submitted for consideration by the Group even where a
project’s status was entirely green.
126/13
Capital investment projects should be removed from the Strategic Projects
Portfolio, as these would be the responsibility of the new Capital Planning
Group and would therefore be included in the Capital Projects Portfolio.
127/13
It was noted that closure reports should be submitted detailing the realisation
of benefits and celebrate the successes where projects had been completed
ahead of schedule.
128/13
Project 1233 should be removed from the list of approved projects, although a
revised and updated project that considered resourcing issues could be
brought forward for consideration for approval.
129/13
A progress report should be submitted as soon as possible for Project 1261.
Action: RM
130/13
The revised delivery dates for these projects were approved.
131/13
Project 1231 Knowledge Gateway should be removed from the Strategic
Projects Portfolio.
132/13
The Group approved changes to the categorisation and definition of project
statuses.
133/13
Further consideration needed to be given to the need for PCG to report to
USG, given that the former was a sub-group of the latter.
Action: RH
134/13
5
7
Reports of Completed Projects
a) JISC SOFACX (PCG/13/28)
Noted
8
135/13
The benefits of the project to the University had not been fully realised,
although it had been a useful insight into the management and value of
participating in external projects. Not all members of the Group were
convinced as to the net benefit to the University of participating in this project.
136/13
The Group recorded its thanks and appreciation to Joanne Tallentire and Rob
Mossop on the excellent delivery of this project.
137/13
Any Other Business
Noted
9
The project closure report was received and was up and running and
available.
There was no other business.
138/13
Date of Next Meeting
11 July 2013, 14:00 to 16:00 in 5N.3.9 (Colchester) and GB.2.31/R2.76
(Southend)
Nicky Jackson
Strategic Planning and Change Section
May 2013
6